For the second time since 2003, all 16 at-large City Council incumbents are running for re-election.* In four races — Wards 2, 3, 5, and 6 — there is a challenger or two. Of the eight incumbents, who’s at the most risk?
While past performance is no guarantee of future results, review of election results back to 2001 reveals two broad trends regarding contested two-incumbent races:
- Challengers do knock off incumbents
- The higher incumbent vote-getter from the prior election never loses their seat
Since 2003, there have been 19 at-large races with two incumbent candidates and a challenger or two. Challengers have prevailed in five races (26%).** Coincidentally, four of the five prevailing challengers and one of the displaced incumbents are running this year.
In none of the 19 at-large races with two incumbents and a challenger or challenger has the incumbent with the higher vote total in the previous election lost their seat (0%).
In 2003 Susan Albright beat out Al Ciccone to win the second at-large seat in Ward 2. In 2001, Ciccone had fewer votes than Marcia Johnson. Ciccone is running this year for the ward seat in Ward 1. Albright is going for her ninth term. While Albright and Johnson traded the top spot in Ward 2 in their overlapping terms, Johnson was the top vote-getter in 2003.***
In 2007, challenger Greer Tan-Swiston beat one-term incumbent Susan Leslie Burg in Ward 3. Burg had run second to Ted Hess-Mahan in 2005, just ahead of Tan Swiston. In the 2011 Ward 6 at-large race, Greg Schwartz beat another one-term incumbent, Charlie Shapiro, who finished second to Vicki Danberg in 2009. Danberg and Schwartz face challenger Alicia Bowman this year.
Jake Auchincloss won his Ward 2 seat in 2015, displacing long-time incumbent Johnson. In 2013, Susan Albright was the high vote getter. Last cycle, Andreae Downs beat long-time incumbent Brian Yates in Ward 5. Yates, who died earlier this year, was second to Deb Crossley in 2015. Before 2017, Yates had faced four challengers; the five contested races are more than any other at-large incumbent from 2003. Johnson had faced two prior challengers before 2015.
Albright and Auchincloss face Jennifer Bentley and Tarik Lucas this year. Crossley and Downs face former Alderman/Councilor and one-time mayoral candidate Paul Coletti.
The additional contested at-large race is Ward 3 where Jim Cote and Andrea Kelley face a challenge from Pam Wright.
If history holds, it’s a tough row to hoe for 2019 challengers Bentley, Bowman, Coletti, Lukas, and Wright. And, if history is a guide, the top vote-getters in each at-large race in 2017 are probably safe — Albright in Ward 2, Crossley in Ward 5, and Danberg in Ward 6. In 2017, Kelley had 8797 votes to Cote’s 8788, so it’s tough to give her the historical benefit.
It’s an interesting mix. Four usurpers — Albright, Auchincloss, Downs, and Schwartz — and two first-termers — Downs and Kelley — defending their seats. And, among the challengers, a previous multi-term Councilor/Alderman in Coletti.
Who among the challengers do you think has the best shot? Are Albright, Crossley, and Danberg safe?
* It previously happened in 2015.
** Since 2003, in races with one incumbent and two or more challengers, no incumbent has lost their seat.
*** No challenger has gotten more votes than both incumbents, though Crossley won more votes than Yates in 2009, when she and Bill Brandel vied for the seat opened when Coletti ran for mayor.
@Sean: Who is Susan Burg? Do you mean Leslie Burg?
Yes. Whoops.
I think Paul Coletti has a good shot for an upset in Ward 5. He was a long serving respected Chairman of Finance and has name recognition.
This election year is a very different one. Several community
groups are consolidated and active in their opposition to outsized
development in key city neighborhoods. In essence Newton’s
government is proposing aggressive housing and commercial development that these communities can not support.
This is a very dire situation because governments must reflect
community consensus. A house divided will not survive.
The city council must not approve the Washington St vision as is.
Both Northland and Riverside must down size. The electorate
must support whatever is finally approved. As for rezoning the city, this can not be pushed down the throats of residential communities. It can not be passed as written so far. Government
must reflect the needs of its residents. Otherwise the electorate
will rebel and force out those who fail them.
What exactly defines something being “pushed down the throats“? As far as I can tell zoning reform has been a very public process with literally years of meetings, deliberations, input sessions, multiple drafts and we’re still months from a possible vote. Glaciers move faster.
Agree Colleen. However the residential communities have the option to petition the council votes on these proposed developments, as Ted Hess-Mahan noted in a previous V14 column.
Oh and Sean, I don’t think Paul Coletti was ever a city councilor.
Actually Ms. Minaker, this is a rather typical election in Newton. A small number of vocal individuals seek to keep the city from, well, progressing. These narrow-minded, totally self-interested NIMBYs raise the horrors of traffic or school overcrowding or use other, far less savory dog-whistles (outcomes whose real severity is invariably miniscule compared to the rhetoric) in an attempt to keep people who own property from being able to use their property in what the vast majority of the population see as reasonable if not downright useful ways. It’s an absurd dynamic that seems to repeat itself on a rather regular basis. One can only hope that the less-than-vocal majority; that is people of good will who are to busy leading their lives, will do what they need to do: get out and vote for something rather than against everything.
@Elmo. Wow. Talk about being over the top. “Narrow minded totally self interested NIMBYs raising the issue of traffic and school overcrowding, .”dog whistles”, etc. This is a pretty broad brush and totally unfair condemnation leveled at a growing if informal coalition of citizens whose concerns cut across specific development or village related issues, historic preservation, political ideology, party affiliation etc. I haven’t seen any polling that I trust on the various development issues that will be front and center in this campaign, but I’m confident that a majority of voters have at least some concerns about the scope, size and pace of development that’s planned or taking place. That’s what I’m finding going door to door in the Highlands collecting signatures for various candidates and I’m not prompting people one way or the other.
@Greg if you read the actual citizen comments to the survey done by the Newtonville Area council, and the notes written by the people at the various visioning sessions, you will see that the residents along Washington Street, including myself would prefer less height ( 4 stories ) and less density in general.
So why bother with the 500000 no bid contract for the principle group and all the theatre? It looks good, but produced little and even after the principle group recommended form based codes ( based on my lengthy conversations with them ) the mayor and the council- I’m talking to you Jake Auchincloss- just gonna do whatever the developers want, such as a 2300 sq foot bank branch that was originally not part of the deal.